Best Practices for Instructional Design

Evidence-based teaching strategies empower educators to design lessons that are both purposeful and impactful, grounded in research that supports student achievement and equity. By incorporating practices like scaffolding, modeling, and frequent checks for understanding, teachers can anticipate learning barriers and proactively address them, ensuring all students remain engaged and supported. Preparation becomes a form of advocacy when educators review prior learning, break down new material into manageable steps, and plan for guided and independent practice, they create a roadmap that builds confidence and retention. Effective communication and clear direction foster trust, reduce cognitive overload, and allow students to focus on meaning-making rather than guesswork. To best prepare, educators can start by identifying lesson objectives, mapping out scaffolds, scripting key questions, and rehearsing transitions that support flow and clarity. These intentional moves transform classrooms into inclusive, enriching environments where every learner feels seen, capable, and connected. 🧭 Steps for Strategic Preparation 1. Clarify the Learning Objective: Start with what students should know or be able to do. Use verbs from Bloom’s taxonomy to guide the level of rigor. 2. Map the Learning Sequence: Break the lesson into digestible chunks review, model, guided practice, independent practice, and reflection. 3. Design Scaffolds and Supports: Prepare visuals, sentence starters, anchor charts, or manipulatives that help all learners access the content. 4. Script Key Questions and Prompts: Plan open-ended questions that connect new material to prior learning and encourage metacognition. 5. Plan for Checks and Feedback: Decide when and how you’ll assess understanding thumbs up/down, exit tickets, think-pair-share, etc. 6. Rehearse Transitions and Timing: Practice how you’ll move between activities, manage materials, and maintain momentum. #TeachWithIntent

𝘓𝘦𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭: Instructional Design is evolving—fast. AI isn’t just a tool anymore. It’s a collaborator. If you're still designing static courses in Storyline or obsessing over ADDIE without integrating AI, you're stuck in the old L&D model. That model is 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲-𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗮 𝗛𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻-𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 ��𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝘁: 1️⃣ 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 Stop thinking like a content creator. Start thinking like a 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘳. Ask: “How can I use AI to close performance gaps in real time?” 2️⃣ 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘁 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 (𝗗𝗲𝗲𝗽𝗹𝘆) Don't just “play” with ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, and Claude. Master how to: ▪️Structure prompts ▪️Chain prompts ▪️Design AI workflows ▪️Generate data-driven learning assets in seconds 3️⃣ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗼𝘁𝘆𝗽𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 Share what you’re building. Post your AI-powered learning experiences on LinkedIn. Turn your process into 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧 of skill. 4️⃣ 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 “𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲𝘀” 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 “𝗦𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀” Employees don’t need more content. They need performance systems: ▪️AI copilots ▪️Embedded nudges ▪️Just-in-time guidance You design the systems. AI delivers the scale. 5️⃣ 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗔𝗜 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁 Go task-by-task through your ID process. Ask: “𝘊𝘢𝘯 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳, 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳, 𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘺?” If yes—build the automation. You’re not just an Instructional Designer anymore. You’re the architect of 𝗛𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻-𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲. Make the leap. Or risk being automated out of the equation. What part of your current workflow do you think AI could take over tomorrow? Drop it below. Let’s dissect it together.

Here's something I've learned as an instructional designer - More interactivity doesn't necessarily equate to a more effective course... In the effort to create engaging content, it's easy to fall into the trap of equating busyness with learning. But let's be real - a course overloaded with clicks, games, and gimmicks might just be pretty packaging on a lackluster product. It may look fun, but if those elements don't align with the course's objectives, they're really just window-dressing. I'm a big believer in avoiding adding unnecessary fluff - words, images, sounds - that don't contribute to learning. These elements can increase cognitive load, leading to learner fatigue and diminished effectiveness. When considering interactive features like quizzes, simulations, or discussions, ask yourself: do they enhance the learning goals? Interactivity can be as simple and profound as fostering a community through discussion, promoting dynamic, peer-supported learning environments. So, here's the takeaway for all of us designing learning experiences... Align every element of your course with the intended learning outcomes. Evaluate the relevance and impact of interactivities. Resist the allure of interactivity for its own sake. Purposeful design is key. What strategies do you use to ensure your course interactivities are meaningful and effective? #eLearning #InstructionalDesign #InstructionalDesigner #LearningandDevelopment

It was beautifully designed. The voiceover was polished. The navigation was smooth. And the quiz? 100%. But… a week later, the learners were still doing things the old way. ⚠️ That’s the problem with “feel-good” learning. It creates the illusion of success - without actual behavior change. Here’s what we’ve learned from the science of learning: 👉 Engagement isn’t the same as effectiveness. 👉 Completion isn’t the same as comprehension. 👉 Satisfaction scores don’t always reflect what learners retained. So, how do we design courses that actually work? ✅ Focus on outcomes - what do learners need to do, not just know? ✅ Embed real-world practice - simulate the messy decisions they’ll make on the job ✅ Use retrieval, spaced learning, and feedback - not just flashy animations ✅ Prioritize what sticks, not what sparkles 💡 The best courses aren’t always the ones learners love in the moment. They’re the ones that change what happens after. What’s one thing you used to think was good learning design… that you now avoid? #InstructionalDesign #LearningEffectiveness #BehaviorChange #LXDesign #CorporateTraining #IDOLAcademy

“We loved the session… but nothing changed.” That was the client’s feedback... after a program I thought went perfectly. Well... there are projects where I mismanaged the training needs discussion, and it cost me the client’s trust. The track I proposed and delivered was solid. It covered all topics a leader should learn about to develop. I spent hours on well-designed slides and material, I ensured engaging facilitation by the trainer, and I even scored 5s in the feedback forms. But a few weeks later, the client told the account manager: “I see no performance improvement.” That moment was disappointing and confusing...but it reminded me that a beautifully designed track isn’t necessarily a successful one unless it solves a real business problem. Since then, I’ve become more intentional about what makes leadership development actually work. Here’s what I’ve learned... that not all learning providers admit, and not all clients enjoy (excuse my boldness): 1) It starts by educating the client: development doesn’t begin or end with a training session. It begins with clarity... on what leadership looks like in their context, and what success should feel like on the ground. 2) As an external consultant, be clear that your role covers design, delivery, and structure, but for the full experience to succeed, HR must own the vision, and line managers must reinforce the learning. 3) We can’t just design sessions, we need to build learning journeys that include what happens before and after. And unless the design is rooted in behavioral psychology, we’re only passing information, not creating transformation. 4) Again and again, face the client with the fact that without manager involvement, even the best-designed content will fade. At the end of the day, the external consultant leaves, and it is the manager who stays. Leadership or any professional level development is built over time... through design, context, and reinforcement. The real impact of any learning program isn’t in the session. It’s in what people do differently afterward. Are we brave enough to design for that? #LeadershipDevelopment #InstructionalDesign #LearningAndDevelopment #BehavioralChange

“My lessons are completely student-centred,” we say but... in class we talk non-stop for 35 minutes, while students quietly copy notes from the board. The intention is there but the practice? Not quite. So what actually makes a lesson centred around the learner? 📍 It’s not just about group work or giving students a say. 📍 It’s about how we design learning, what we prioritise and how much ownership students truly have. One powerful way to bridge this gap is by returning to the principles of instruction—based on solid research into what really works in classrooms: 📍 Begin lessons with a short review of prior learning 📍 Present new material in small, manageable steps 📍 Ask questions to check for understanding throughout 📍 Provide models and worked examples 📍 Guide student practice with scaffolds before releasing independence 📍 Engage students in frequent, successful retrieval practice 📍 Provide immediate, clear feedback 📍 Ensure a high success rate before moving on 📍 Monitor independent practice and support where needed 📍 Revisit material to strengthen retention These are not rigid rules but they remind us that effective teaching is intentional, layered and focused on how students learn, not just how teachers teach. True student-centred learning isn’t about stepping back completely. It’s about designing instruction that empowers students without leaving them to figure it all out alone. 📍 What principle do you lean on most in your teaching? #ZippysClassroom #MakeTeachingGreat #PrinciplesOfInstruction #StudentCentredLearning #TeacherReflection #EducationMatters #EffectiveTeaching

AI is reshaping the future of learning, not by replacing educators, but by amplifying human potential. I just read Google’s new position paper on 'AI and the Future of Learning', and several points resonate strongly with my own experiences in e-learning, agentic AI, and responsible innovation. Key takeaways for educators, learning designers and AI practitioners:- 1. Human-in-the-loop matters:- AI should empower teachers and learners, not supplant them. Educators remain central in designing, customizing, and supervising AI tools. 2. Personalized, adaptive learning:- AI can meet learners where they are, adapt to their pace, strengths, and needs, especially powerful in large scale or resource-constrained settings. 3. Ethics, fairness, transparency:- Tools must be built responsibly, transparent about data usage, bias, and decisions. Learners, teachers, and their families should understand how AI arrives at suggestions and always have recourse. 4. Skills for the future:- Beyond knowledge recall, education needs to foster curiosity, metacognition, collaboration, and lifelong learning. AI becomes a partner in cultivating how we learn, not just what we learn. As someone who leads e-learning and agentic AI initiatives (and working on courses / frameworks for learning system design), here are some reflections:- 1. Design with pedagogy first:- When building courses or tools, we must anchor in learning science and best practices. Agents or AI modules should align with what we know about how people learn, including cognitive load, scaffolding, and feedback loops. 2. Build with practitioners:- Co-design with educators ensures the AI tools remain grounded in context, and helps avoid misalignment or unintended biases. 3. Measure impact holistically:- Beyond completion or test scores, we should evaluate growth in learner agency and self regulation, especially for adult learners or professionals. 4. Scale responsibly:- The potential for scaling personalized learning is huge, but we must not lose sight of the social, cultural, and equity aspects of learning design. 🧭 In my upcoming course on Augmenting Collective Intelligence via Autonomous Agents + Human Experts, I'll integrate several of these insights:- embedding AI tutors in training, designing feedback loops, and ensuring alignment with ethical & pedagogical frameworks. 💡 Question for my network:- How are you balancing AI tool adoption in education or training environments while preserving educator control, equity, and learner agency? Would love to hear your experience or frameworks that are working. #AI #EdTech #LearningDesign #AgenticAI #LifelongLearning #InstructionalDesign #AIgovernance

Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction was revolutionary in its time. But that time was nearly 80 years ago. It was built for military training—linear, rigid, objective-driven. It assumes the designer controls everything, the learner starts from zero, and outcomes are best achieved by following a prescribed sequence. That’s not how learning works anymore. Modern learners are rarely blank slates. They come with prior knowledge, personal context, and the ability to access what they need on demand. They’re not sitting passively, waiting for content to be “presented.” They’re navigating ambiguity, asking questions, collaborating, and applying knowledge in complex, unpredictable environments. That’s why I’ve moved away from traditional instructional design models like Gagné—and toward frameworks that reflect how people actually learn. I draw from Learning Experience Design (LXD), which blends learning science, user experience, and accessibility to create more engaging and emotionally resonant learning. I also pull from the 5E model, which prioritizes inquiry and exploration, and Universal Design for Learning (UDL), which builds flexibility and inclusivity into every part of the design. Models like Design Thinking and Agile Learning Design keep me grounded in iteration, learner feedback, and real-world relevance. And Bob Mosher’s Moment of Need Model reminds me that not all learning happens during training—it often happens in the workflow, under pressure, when support is needed most. I don’t follow any of these models religiously. I use what fits. Because the moment we box ourselves into one system, we stop designing for people and start designing for process. Gagné made sense in a world of chalkboards and overhead projectors. Today, we’re designing for mobile, social, immersive, and AI-powered experiences. That requires more flexibility, more empathy, and a willingness to break the mold when it no longer fits. Models are helpful. Dogma is not.

I used Adobe Captivate. Built courses. Hit publish. And thought I was an instructional designer. 🤦🏾♂️ New IDs and eLearning developers, hear me out: Building training content with #eLearning authoring tools does NOT make you an instructional designer. That's like saying, "Because I use Microsoft Excel in my job, that makes me a data analyst." Not! ❌ The tool is not the craft. I know because I fell into this same trap. The wake-up call came while working at a previous employer. I was part of a small internal group collaborating with an L&D consultant to build a leadership development course. Working alongside that consultant? It exposed how poor my actual instructional design skills were. 👉🏾 She asked questions I never thought to ask. 👉🏾 She applied frameworks I'd only heard of. 👉🏾 She approached the learner experience in ways I hadn't considered. I was humbled. And grateful. That experience showed me how much I still had to learn beyond clicking buttons and arranging slides. Don't fall into the same trap I did. If you want to grow as an instructional designer, immerse yourself in: 🔹 Sound instructional design frameworks (Action Mapping, SAM, Backward Design) 🔹 Cognitive Load Theory 🔹 The science of how people actually learn and retain information The tools will always change. New versions. New features. New platforms. But the fundamentals of effective learning design? Those are timeless. 🙅🏾♂️ Your value isn't in mastering Captivate, Storyline, or Rise. ✅ Your value is in knowing the WHY and HOW of learning in the first place! #IDProThomas #NewIDCareerTips #InstructionalDesign 🤎 BE ENCOURAGED 🤎 Enjoyed this post? Help others discover it by: ➡️ Following me for more, 📝Commenting, ♻️Reposting it, and Saving it, to reread later! 😉

One of the first Instructional Design projects I worked on still sticks with me. The client handed me eight separate slide decks and said: “Can you turn all of this into one training?” 😑 I remember opening the files: hundreds of slides, all important in their own way, but something didn’t sit right. So, I asked a question that’s become my go-to ever since: “What’s the actual moment in the job where someone gets stuck, messes up, or hesitates, and needs this?” That question changed everything. Instead of cramming it all into a mega-course, we: ✅ Cut 70% of the content ✅ Turned the rest into two scenario-based simulations ✅ Built a one-page job aid that’s still in use today And the best part? People applied it, and didn't complain about taking it. The motivation to complete the course increased. The behavior changed. The feedback improved. I learned early on that we’re not here to cover content. We’re here to solve real work problems. So now, every time I hear, “Can you just turn this into a course?” I slow it down and ask: “What do people need to do, and where do they get stuck?” If you’ve been in that spot, I’d love to hear how you handled it👇. It can be a tough discussion, and pushing back respectfully can be daunting sometimes. #InstructionalDesign #LearningAndDevelopment #LXD #CorporateTraining #RealWorldLearning #JobRelevance #EarlyCareerLessons